How to feed and keep the animals on the Ark?

I'll cite from a review of the book. The full review can be read at:
Review of John Woodmorappe's "Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study"He breaks it down by genera. He tosses out all amphibians and invertebrates. He cites feeding pandas a complex replacement diet that is time-consuming to make. All animals were taught to go to the bathroom on command into buckets, as well as to exercize on command, and to often feed on things that zoos still can't get animals to eat. Noah is able to adjust temperatures around the ark. Noah took the time to ""maximize the heterozygosity of the recessive alleles" to avoid inbreeding depression after the flood", and bred strains of animals more likely to hibernate, eat dried or bad food, etc. Seed plants survived by being buried underneath miles of water, then being eroded, and somehow managed to remain dormant. Lots of name-calling. Contradicts self about earthworms and doesn't address migration to the ark. Contradicts self about #s of alleles. Cites calculations not listed, including complex ones like heat production. Tables show incorrect numbers, and contradict each other. Assumes some sort of gravity-based urine drainage (from the bottom deck??). Doesn't get into labor for animal maintinence of this sort. Uses incorrect units and false statements on heat discussion. Uses incorrect air flow formulae. Also forgets about rain, assumes wind keeps ark humidity low. Assumes huge evolutionary leaps in that freshwater animals of all kinds could rapidly adapt to living in saltwater (in addition to shallow water -> ocean, etc). Suggests all carnivores eat rotten carcasses of what was left outside in the flood when they get off the ark, instead of the live animals getting off. Assumes huge mutation rate right after animals get off the ark (no reason given). Half-hearted pseudogene attempt.For more on the flood, visit:
Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

It's not like they had any real grasp of any biology. Take, for instance, birds:Leviticus 1:13-19
'These, moreover, you shall detest among the birds; they are abhorrent, not to be eaten: the eagle and the vulture and the buzzard, and the kite and the falcon in its kind, every raven in its kind, and the ostrich and the owl and the sea gull and the hawk in its kind, and the little owl and the cormorant and the great owl,
and the white owl and the pelican and the carrion vulture, and the stork, the heron in its kinds, and the hoopoe, and the bat.We're expected to believe that a culture which doesn't know the difference between bats and birds is supposed to achieve feats of zoology never before managed with the benefit of modern technology from a shoestring crew who has a preposterously huge engineering task to do at the same time. ------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Yeah, nice guy. Lost his tenure and was kicked out of Bowling Green State University, for, what he wrote in White Supremacist and KKK Wizard David Duke's "National Association of White People" newsletter, "reverse racial discrimination was clearly part of the decision". His letter might as well have been written in the deep south in the 1950s. I strongly encourage you to read it: Jerry Bergman and Racism - it's the appendix at the bottom. When questioned about why he was fired and was writing in a KKK journal, he claimed that he was seeking "information from racists groups for [his] research against racism." (note: no request for information was there - he wrote a letter to the editor blaming his firing on reverse discrimination).What else about Bergman? How about making a nonexistant line about Nebraska Man, preportedly from the journal "Science" (he flat-out added in the following line into a paragraph, right between two real lines: "Evidence of this anthropoid ape-man was also proof that some primitive humans lived in America, and some speculated that it may even prove that mankind in North America predated European and African humans" - c'mon, who would even believe that "Science" wrote the word "ape-man" in the first place???)Want more? He's got plenty of amusements out there ------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Amusing response from Bergman. Note the following (sometimes I'll slip into addressing Bergman directly - just so you know):1) He doesn't try to claim that he has a degree in biology from anywhere except Columbia Pacific - but he tries to deceive the reader into thinking that he does by talking about his "science" degrees from elsewhere.2) He cites as proof that "Tenspeed"'s publication is a good source about what are good colleges, a library bulletin's subject line about Tenspeed. Summaries for books and publications are created by the people who author them; thus, he is actually consulting Ten Speed Press in determining that Ten Speed Press is a good source about colleges.Is Columbia Pacific a Degree Mill? YES! No amount of word-wrangling changes that fact! In 1999, the Marin County Superior Court upheld an order that ordered it shut down, fined them 10,000$, prevented them from ever operating again, and ordered the refunding all students. According to the court, they gave people free credit for "prior learning experience", didn't employ professional faculty, and didn't even approach requirements for PHDs. That's a degree mill. Sorry there, Bergman! And just because a whopping two of the university's "graduates" made a success of themselves, hardly changes that fact. (want a list of the university's graduates involved in scandals?)3) Nice boast about your PHD being published by University Microfilms International. UMI describes itself as "the publisher, cataloger, and marketer of doctoral dissertations." Read their page: They publish *EVERYONE*. Page not Found | Division of Graduate Studies4) Nice list of places who were suckered into hiring members from your degree-mill university. Sort of like your followers who were suckered into believing that you actually know what you're talking about in Biology because of your "PHD".5) Yeah, nutrition and excercise to deal with high blood pressure was controvertial back in the 1980s. And I lived on Mars back then.6) He cites as evidence that the assistant director of CPPVE had "made up her mind" to close down the school two year before investigators investigated it. However, this claim by CPU's lawyers was determined to be utterly without base, and the court ruled against CPU.7) They're still open in Wyoming! Wow! After being chased out of California, and then out of Montana, they're trying Wyoming. Gee, this bodes well... Do you know what their current level of accreditation is from? Malawi (the tiny African nation east of Zambia).8) Did you perchance ask the author of that accreditation study that you cited what he thought of CPU? This line of argument is laughable. If I had a school that operated out of a cardboard box, and it lost its accreditation, and I cited an article by a single author which raises some questions about accreditation, would you believe that my school was any good at all?9) CPU was first shut down in 1996 by CBPPVE. In 1997, this was upheld by a law judge. The 1999 ruling denied all further appeals. So, attacking CBPPVE hardly does anything for your case.10) Don't even get me into that mockery of education that you treat as acceptable about "known entities" being a substitute for people with credentials.11) Note that Mr. "I am not a racist" credits the fact that a later place that he worked which hired people who weren't PHDs to the fact that they were minorities, and that the university chose them over white men with PHDs.12) Nice hand-waving, but saying "other places are doing it to!" doesn't get CPU out of giving excessive credit - as upheld on the intial ruling and two separate judicial reviews (along with their untrained "teachers" and invalid PHD requirements).13) Ah, so if I want my Cardboard Box University (CBU) to be valid, I need to just make it so that I turn down some student papers - regardless of whether I have any scientific qualifications at all, whether I know what I'm talking about, whether I'm fulfilling state PHD requirements.....14) Satisfaction of students is utterly irrelevant to whether they were actually being taught relevant material for the degree-mill PHD that they'll get to wave around like you've done. Likewise, "quality of instruction" is equally irrelevant if the teachers aren't knowledgable about the subject.15) Comparing your school to online courses is hardly fair - seing as they haven't been chased out of two states and aren't acredited from a nation whose GDP is less than a 10th of Bill Gates' net worth, and whose per-capita income would take about their entire average lifespan to buy a single new car.16) Hey Lippard, if you can't remember the letter that you wrote for the KKK, I already provided the link! ------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Nonsense. Birds have incredibly distinct bone structures, muscular structures, facial structures, eating habits, digestive systems, feathers vs. hair, and everything else from bats. If one of the authors of the bible had been willing to examine a bat, they would have noticed this. Dragonflies are also flying, winged creatures. They're also not birds, and at least the authors of the bible recognized this. The ostrich is a bird and it doesn't fly, and yet the authors of the bible recognized that it was a bird. Clearly "flying", and pretty likely "winged creatures", wasn't their method of classification.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 09-09-2003]

quote:

---

Page 1O, Table 1, Total Body Mass 15,754 grams.
Page 18, Table 4, total food dry matter. 1990 tons.
Page 20, Table 6, Total Water, 4.07 megaliters (9.4% of Ark volume)

---

Translation: We're going to assume juveniles of all animals, even though many animals cannot survive without being nurtured and taught by their parents. Plus, the Bible says "the male and his mate" (kind of hard for whiptail lizards, wouldn't you say)? We're going to severely limit the number of dinosaurs on board. We're going to take *no* insects or arthropods on board, contradicting the Bible itself. We're only going to collect animals at the genus and family levels (despite the bible listing many "kinds" at what is clearly the species level) (since the donkey and horse are both early in the old testament, *wow*, they evolved fast!). Screw the freshwater animals - they'll mutate to adapt in days, a miracle of evolution! Who needs precariously balanced coral reef environments, for one of thousands of examples!We're going to use modern pelletting and preservation systems in the bronze age. We're going to provide a variety of diet that zoos have entire massive kitchen staffs for a fraction of the species, and use abstract feeding methods that have never worked in history.

quote:

---

Chapter 4, Waste Management pages 23-35.

---

Translation: All large animals will be trained to go to the bathroom in buckets, on command, at the same interval between species (clearly he's never been near a large animal going to the bathroom). Urine will be expected to automatically drain out of the boat (yeah, urine goes upwards in Woodmorape's world). While the numbers are conveniently left sketchy, the amount of people needed to take out the mass of waste produced 24/7 are thus barely less than Noah's entire crew - assuming that they can immediately go from animal to animal in quick succession.

quote:

---

Chatper 5, Heating, Ventilation, and Illuminaton of the Ark, p. 37-42

---

Actually, his book *doesn't* address how a constantly raining, 100% humidity environment is expected to keep everything dry and cool (and non-rotting, I might mention Perhaps Noah is supposed to develop some lacquer for the wood in the same plant he makes his pelletted food? ). He actually suggests the cooling method as "opening the windows" (hope there's no rough seas in this flood that is carving canyons and depositing mountains!). Great plan, Woody! Now, how do you take care of the polar bears and the emperor penguins? Collect icebergs on the way?In short: You don't get to get off just by posting chapters from Woodmorape's lousy book. You have to actually discuss his claims.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Biology was hardly a field in Darwin's time, so it's not shocking. It was little more than zoology and identification. Of course, the basic tenents (not all the details, of course) of Darwin's work is accepted by virtually all professionals working in the field of biology and other scientists, after a century and a half of study. How many PHDs? Well, you know how a lot of creationists like to show their list of PHDs who believe in Creationism? Check out "Project Steve" http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=18As for Kuban, he has a BA in Biology, and is president of the Fossil society of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History (and a number of other palentology societies) . Not to mention that most creationists who have studied the Paluxy case accept his work as correct It's sad that there have been so many creationist hoaxes and irresponsible work like that, which get treated as if they're published in a dozen peer-reviewed journals. I (and even most creationists) can only name two cases, through the entire history of archaeology, where that has occured with evolutionists. If you'd like, I could rattle about two dozen or so such creationist ones in the past 20 years alone (and they keep repeating them even after retraction/obvious disproval! Why can't you get peer review or check your sources before you publish??? Or ask the author whose material you're citing if they agree with your wild interpretation of their work, or look up whether what you're doing is the way a scientific procedure is actually done before you claim that you've disproved it with your incorrect failed result, etc... And don't get me started on the "fossils" and "pictures" that have turned up over the years Or the degree mills.... (ok, I'll stop) )------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 09-10-2003][This message has been edited by Rei, 09-10-2003]

First off, let me thank you for finally doing more than simply asserting things to the effect of "Woodmorappe says it will work.".

quote:

---

This amounts to about 2000 individuals (out of some 16000). You are deliberatly misrepresenting and exagerating the issue.

---

My apologies for saying "all", I misread. However, he chose juveniles of everything big enough to matter. And, large animals tend to be the ones who need parents to bring them up to survive more often. He's flat out cheating. And contradicting the Bible, at that. And do you know why he's cheating? Because he undoubtedly discovered that using adults of large animals increases the overall bulk 13-50 fold! Additionally, the mortality rate of juveniles of some species is obscenely high - especially the ones that he finds essential to bring juveniles of (namely, Sauropods). A juvenile brachosaurus alone is believed to have grown at about 10 feet in height and over 15 tons per year.

quote:

---

You still need 2 whiptail lizards, one which is under the control of progesterone (the male hormone) and one which is under the control of estrogen (the female hormone). So you still have the male and female hormones but in a unique and interesting animal.

---

Um, no. They only take on the roles when "mating". There is none that is "under the control" of a particular hormone for the long term - you'll note that they switch roles. And you ignore that *There Are No Male Whiptail Lizards*.

quote:

---

p. 5. I have included all 87 commonly-cited sauropod dinosaur genera as valid, and placed them on the Ark. Yet, according to sauropod specialist McIntosh, only twelve sauropod genera can be regarded as "firmly established" and an additional twelve "fairly well established"
So, rather than limit the number of dinosaurs, woodmorappe counts more than what are considered "established" in the scientific world. You deliberatly make claims not supported by the evidence.

---

An apparent 50-70% of "Woodmorappe"'s (BTW, you do know that that's a pseudonym, right? And that he's quoted himself as if it's a different person ) animals are known only from fossils. Yet, this isn't the slightest bit accurate. The vast majority of genera of large mammals in the world, for example, are known only from fossils, and more are constantly being found, with no indication of slowing. Concerning Sauropods, he doesn't state that that 12 is an overestimate - because it's not even close. There are *87 genera* of sauropods. Woody puts the far out claim that 12 are "firmly established" and another 12 are "fairly well established". Then the number he uses? 12. And he makes them juveniles at that. What preposterous nonsense!

quote:

---

p. 3 "The Hebrew terminology in the Genesis account rules out invertebrates having been taken on the Ark (Jones, 1973)." Part of that reasoning includes the requirement that those animals deliberatly saved on the ark breath through their nostils. Insects do not have nostrils nor lungs.

---

What it says was brought on the ark was, to quote the hebrew, remes (pronounced reh-mes). His "nostril" claim is garbage. Remes means "creeping thing", and was used throughout the bible to refer specifically to insects.

quote:

---

p.5. Some "have the audacity to level the false charge that creationists have invented the concept of the created kind as an ad hoc device to reduce the numbers of animals on the Ark. These critics seem willingly ignorant of the many evidences of the created kind being broader than the species. p.6 There is a very fundamental reason why the created kind must, at minimum, be at the generic and not specific leve. The genus is the smallest division of plants and animals that can usually be indentified without scientific study (Cain 1956, p. 97) ... Many biologists use the term syngameon (see Templeton 1991a) to refer to the most inclusive unit of interbreeding among plants and animals. The syngameon is usually broader than the species and even, in many cases, the genus.... Jones (1972b), largely using Scriptural evidence (e.g. the animals lists in Leviticus) demonstrated that the created kind is approximately equivalent to the subfamily or family, at least in the case of birds and animals."

---

Did you actually write this without laughing? "The genus is the smallest division of plants and animals that can usually be indentified without scientific study"? Yeah, I can't tell the difference between a horse and a zebra. I can't tell the difference between a coyote and a jackal. I can't tell the difference between a housecat and a lion. I can't tell the difference between a sheep and an urial. What on *EARTH* was he smoking when he penned that line?Look, he can claim that "scientists define it as this", but that doesn't make it true. species interbreed - Google SearchPick your source - let's say, the American Museum of Natural History? They discuss the two chief definitions of species used by scientists: BSC (Biological Species Concept) and PSC (Phylogenetic Species Concept). BSC is related to interbreeding. PSC is related to clearly distinct geographical and physical traits. PSC actually includes more diversity in the definition of species than BSC. Current taxa are a mix of BSC and PSC, but are mostly still BSC.The list in Leviticus is subfamily and family???? Ok, let's take a look, shall we? Let's take a look at a few of the kinds of birds mentioned in the bible. Eagle. Vulture. Osprey. Buzzard. "Kites of all kinds". "Ravens of all kind". Ostrich. Nighthawk. Seagull. "Hawks of all kinds". The little owl. The cormorant. The great owl. The white owl. The pellican. The carrion vulture. The stork. "Herons of all kinds". The hoopoe. The bat . The turtledove. The swallow. (I could go on, but let's just look at these, ne? )Let's look at what modern scientists recognise as living in Israel. (http://www.science.co.il/Bird-Species.asp?s=falconiformes for example). The "eagle" seems to represent the aquila genus. There are three vultures (I ran into two in my short search of the bible), so we're looking at pretty close to species here. Osprey is a species, Pandion haliaetus (only one lives in Israel). There are two buzzards, so it's either a genus or subgenus. Kites of all kinds clearly indicates species, as does "ravens of all kind". Only one member of Struthio - the ostrich - lives in the region (only member of it's family, too); it's accurate to the species level. Nighthawks only have one genus (and even one family) in the region - they're very specific in their form in Israel, like Ostriches; kind here is accurate to the genus level. The owl descriptions are different from modern terms to make a determination, but it is probably either genus or subfamily. Only one genus of pelicans exists in Israel, and the term "pelican" is thus accurate to the genus level; same with cormorants. Herons are subfamily. Hoopoe is species (alaemon alaudipes).In short, the most common definition was the species level. The next most common was the genus/subgenus level. Is this special for birds? Not at all! A glaring example to anyone who reads the bible is horses and donkeys, but mammals as a whole are even more representative of the species level in the region than birds.Hey, in Genesis 47:17, when Joseph is alive (about 600 years after the flood), horses are referenced a number of times. Donkeys were given to Abram by the Pharao in Genesis 12:16! There are both wild and dmoestic donkeys in Gen. 16:12. Dear YVHV, that's fast evolution there! If evolution can happen that fast, nothing can stop it!

quote:

---

In chapter 17, Woodmorappe shows that much aquatic life can survive varying degrees of salinity. (There is not enought room here to present eveything he presents, you will need to get the book).

---

And Mr. Pseudonym quite clearly knows nothing about fish. Look, I've helped my parents take care of their reef tank. You wouldn't believe how sensitive those things are to changes in temperature and salinity. Even moving a rock around can throw the ecosystem out of whack.A flood that is supposed to carve out massive canyons and deposit mountains has nice salinity stratification? Temperature too, right? And they all manage to keep all animals in the flood precisely in the salinity and temperature they were initially at? Wow, I guess anything can happen with magic! I'm picturing this floating coral reef, anenomes everywhere, clownfish desparately clinging onto its favorite anenome (yes, they pick favorites) for dear life, staying right near the surface with nice warm water and perfect salinity... an octopus hunting, plucking up shellfish floating through the water... brittle stars trying to hold their shelter of corals and rocks together so that they don't get devoured... I'm picturing fish who have short lifespans doing their egg laying in this, as if everything were perfectly normal... Meanwhile, the grand canyon is getting carved, multiple eruptions are forming basalt in the columbia river basin....

quote:

---

The coral reef environments were destroyed in the flood. New ones formed after the flood.

---

Um, you know absolutely nothing about coral reefs. Sit down with someone who owns a reef tank for a few hours. The porous rocks and dead coral are filled with tiny polyps which can't survive outside of them, and need a nice, calm environment to survive. The corals and anenomes themselves may well retract for a week if you simply *scare them*. If you add a new coral to a new, perfect environment, it often takes months before it will adapt, and it's critical that you feed them properly during this time. You have to make sure that the right combinations of fish are in there, or they'll tear it to bits. Everything in a reef is very delicate and interconnected; if you're not careful, you're going to destroy it. There's a reason that damaged reefs are slow to repair *in an ideal, calm environment*, and are a hot button issue amongst conservationists. What do we have here, a nice, "fluffy" catastrophic flood, that carried and nutured this delicate environment, floating at the surface, and then destroyed it "gently" or set it down so that it could carefully redevelop?(reversing order of quotes before for reasons of answering...)

quote:

---

The use of pelleted diets on the Ark is predicated on the fact of the antediluvians having the know-how to compress substances. Let us consider the pessimistic possibility that the technology of the antediluvians had been no greater than that of the peoples of later Biblical times. We know that, in ancient Israel, mechanical presses were in use to compress olive pulp to extract its oil. The presses need only have been capable of exerting a small fraction of the pressure of modern hay-compressing equipment, since even a modest amout of pressure applied for a fairly long time will reduce the volume of hay considerably, particularly if sufficient moisture in the hay is available."

---

Modest pressure applied to hay for a long period of time is rotten hay. Besides, Noah's plant needs to process 110lbs per day *of output* to reach Woody's number's. If running slowly, you're going to need something the size of a factory to make. Which would require a massive iron forge. But, as stated, low pressure isn't enough. Not only does *real* pelletting require high pressure, it also requires high temperatures to kill off the bacteria and to get the food dry before it rots away. Or, does your special pre-biblical world have hay that doesn't rot? And these low pressure pellets which store for 100 years, right? And all of the large animals can eat the pelletted food

quote:

---

The dating of post-flood cultures, including the Bronze Age, older than the Flood is bogus. Noah did not live in the post-flood Bronze Age.

---

Yeah, Noah had a high-temperature compressor plant capable of rapidly processing 20 tons of food pear year, assuming that he could build it in one year (110 lbs per day), with magical food preservation that lasts for 100 years. And, of course, with his high technology, he made his boat out of wood and pitch.

quote:

---

Every feeding method Woodmorappe proposes are in use now and are technologically simple. You will have to read Chapter 8, (Manpower Studies/Feading and Watering) yourself because I'm not going to type in the whole thing here.

---

Look - why on earth do you think that zoos employ hundreds, for a fraction of the animals? No, you don't get away with saying "look it up", because it's unanswered. Do you think that they're idiots? Do you think that it takes *less* labor in cramped conditions? It takes hundreds because The Requirements To Care For Animals Increases With The Diversity Of The Animals In Addition To Their Numbers. What is so difficult for you to understand about this?Why don't zoos train all large animals to go to the bathroom on command? Because the animals don't. Why don't they feed all animals the same food? Because they'll die. Why don't they apply the tineist level of attention to each animal? Because disease will spread not just through one type, but across species. Why do they minimize mixing of animals? Because even if the animals magically aren't hostile to each other, large animals *accidentally* hurt or kill each other with ease."Woodmorappe" is claiming to know better about how to care for every animal on earth than the entire experience of every zoo in human history combined. He is claiming to know more about food pelletting than every farmer who's shipped livestock in the history of mankind up until the advent of modern machinery and all of those involved in the shipping. He claims that massive wood and pitch ships can survive weather worse than that which sinks steel ships. He claims feats of construction more advanced than that which took entire shipyards. He claims massive feats of evolution. He claims magical non-rotting everything. He claims miraculous survivals on floating vegetation of things like leafcutter ants and their fungus culture to intricately balanced ecosystems like parasitic wasps which lay eggs in the bodies of tarantulas, which survive on a large quantity of insects consumed, to aphids which parasite live plants... He claims miraculous seed preservation via methods that have *never* preserved a seed for a year, let alone manage to preserve every seed and spore currently found on Earth, from water-sensitive cactus seeds to delicate, tiny african violet seeds. And worst of all, he flatly contradicts the bible that he is supposed to be defending, on many fronts.There are reasons why what "Woody" proposes aren't done: They are complete and utter BS. From aardvark food to rapid zebra evolution post flood, "Woodmorappe" is full of the same stuff that he claims can be collected in buckets and won't stink up the ark due to its heavenly circulation and refrigeration system.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

1. The use of the word "All" never appears in Woodmorappe's comments.

---

Right, it's ok if *some* animals sit around in their own feces. They won't get sick, everything perfect in Woodmorappe's world.

quote:

---

3. This was just for urine and not for manure.

---

Right, and that works all the better. It's easy to clean manure off the ground - zoos do it so quickly, right?

quote:

---

4. Intervals of time is never even considered.

---

They're trained to do it on command. I'd call that an interval of time.

quote:

---

For animals on the upper deck above the waterline, the urine (and even manure) could easily be drained overboard while at afloat through gated outfalls. For those below water line urine and liquified manure could held in tanks while afloat, and then drain automatically through gated outfalls after grounding. Then again, Woodmorappe explores how to manually move excrement from lower areas to above water line where it could be dumped through gated outfalls. He also explores the posibility of all manure and urine being kept aboard throughout the entire year.

---

Yes, Noah and his massive urine and feces tanks, and system to raise them. Are you familiar at all with how much effort it took to transport even horses on Roman ships, for example? Let alone things like elephants, or even worse brachiosaurs? The average elephant produces 50 pounds of dung *every day* (naturally, Woodmorappe only brings one pair - african, indian, pygmy, etc, all evolve). That's 100 lbs for the elephants. Take a guess on the brachiosaurs!!! Assuming weight ratios are indicative of dung ratios, the pair of brachiosaurs, that's 1300 lbs of dung per day. There are *12* species of sauropods on Woody's boat, and on a real boat, which takes a tiny fraction of the sauropods discovered so far - ignoring the rest, and ignoring those not yet found. Just assuming an average of 1/3 that much dung, we're talking that Sauropods alone are producing 5200 lbs of dung on Woody's boat, and 38,000 lbs on a real boat. *From the sauropods alone*.To store it (remember - no disease in Woodmorappe's world!), he has to cheat even further on the number of animals - heavily. Why doesn't he just say "they're in deep freeze and stacked one on top of another"?

quote:

---

Out of the 365 or so days, only the first 150 had rain

---

Oh silly me, that makes such a *huge* difference!

quote:

---

Woodmorappe calcualtes that with just using a row of windows along the top of the ark, the air circulation caused by animal heat would result in 5 air changes of the Ark per hour.

---

"Changes per hour" is pseudoscience; anyone who tried to design a structure based on such a principal should be shot (figuratively, of course ).

quote:

---

When outside air with 100 percent humidity enters the Ark, it warms up because of the animal heat. If the outside air temperature were a moderate 77 deg. F (25 deg C) and upon enter the Ark it is warmed up to 86 deg. F (30 deg C) then the humidity would fall from 100% to 75%. If the outside temperature were 68 deg. F (20 deg. C) and warmed up to 86 (30 C) then the humidity would drop to 57%.

---

First off, that's relative humidity - just a nitpick. 57% humidity isn't even close. Read about raising desert tortoises some time, as an example - unless you have a magical disease-free world, they get sick very easily if you don't keep the humidity to a bare minimum. To make it worse, animals are not creating just heat - they're releasing *HUMIDITY*. The situation is getting worse, not better.Note how you didn't address the emperor penguins and polar bears. So, how are all these animals doing when they walked to the ark? The ark is at one specific climatic location in the world. Let me guess - they all evolved to different climates afterward, perhaps, but were temperate species before? What amazing evolutionary prowess they have! (let's not get into their long walk home... ).

quote:

---

The Ark was coated inside and out with "pitch." The pitch was likely boiled down from tree sap. That has commonly been done over the ages.

---

*Completely coated*? That's going to take pretty much as much pitch as wood (you don't just apply pitch like a lacquer, it's thick and horridly sticky). If he's *extracting it from wood* (which is actually resin, not pitch, but we'll play make-believe - note that the bible says ".. from resinous wood, and seal it with tar, inside and out" - they know the difference!)), the wood to make that pitch will be exponentially more than the wood to make the ark. Even the most resinous of woods (such as pines) is only a very small fraction resin. Even if it's a whopping 10% (Wow! How would the tree stay standing?), that's 10 times more wood than to build the ark. How's Noah's saw mill doing? And his pitch plant? And his pelletting plant? And his forge? Hell, why don't we just give him a space ship while we're at it?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Hey, let's start coming up with the requirements for Noah's industrial capacity here, shall we? This should be fun. Logging industry:
We'll pretend that he's got a nice sized team of lumberjacks, well-stocked with nice metal axes, a cooking and cleaning crew, etc and can work all of the time for the 100 years. We'll also be nice, and have the logs shipped down a river to the sawmill, using carts or rollers to get them to the river.Sawmill:
Takes in feedstocks from the logging industry
Produces either completely shredded wood for the pitch plant, or well-cut boards for the ark.
To process the amount of wood we're talking about, hand cuts aren't going to "cut it", so to speak. It's far, far, far too slow to cut planks out of even a single log with a hand saw and/or axe, even with 100 years to work. We're going to need shaped metal disks (several) (we'll be nice and make them be just steel or iron, no diamond teeth - he can forge more when they dull!). It'll be driven on a rod hooked up to a gear chain, hooked up to the power source (river perhaps? Add a waterwheel). The blades will need to be mounted to strip the logs as well as to slice them, so we're going to need your typical extensive plant. Shredding will require a grinder, and some sort of hoisting mechanism (the board cutting may take a hoist as well).Pitch (actually resin, but we'll pretend that it's pitch!) plant:
Takes in feedstocks from the sawmill. Feedstocks are lifted via a hoisting mechanism (conveyor? forklift? crane?) into one of perhaps 50 or so steel vats, which have constant fires underneath them (wood also from the sawmill - scrap, perhaps). Logs are pressure-cooked for several weeks, to extract the "pitch". A skimmer skims off the pitch, and stores it in a cooling vats. Actually being resin instead of pitch, it will cool quite solid, and adhere to the vat, so it will need to be made of multiple components that can come apart, and possibly a powered drive mechanism to assist in it. The tank is then emptied, and the water drained from the shredded wood, which is then exported to the farming community for fertilizer.Farming community:
A farming community is needed to supply all of the workers with food. They can get sap-depleted wood chips for fertilizer from the pitch plant. They of course need their own supplies - wood for construction and tools, metal for tools, etc.Wood-treating plant:
The logs are treated to be water-resistant at Noah's treatment plant. It takes feedstocks of cut boards from the sawmill, and pitch from the pitch plant. Pitch is heated up to high temperatures, and boards are placed inside for a period of several minutes, sterilizing and drying the board, and coating it with a thick layer of pitch. The boards are then hung from hooks, since they'll stick to whatever they're touching when they dry. Cranes will be needed to assist in the dipping/removing/hanging process, since this is bubbling sap we're talking about. Finished boards are exported to the shipyard.Shipyard:
Takes finished, treated boards from the wood treatment plant, and iron from the forge. Assembles them into a 3-deck boat. Given the standards from what we know of shipyards that built ancient boats, even if they had the full 100 years, this would still be a very labor intensive task.Forge:
Takes feedstocks from Noah's iron mining operation. Produces farming tools, woodcutting tools, saws, gears, shafts, cranes and other hoists, cables, vats, nails, ship reinforcement, mining equipment, and much, much more. Would require a blast furnace (which itself is no small amount of steel ).Iron mining:
Picture any sort of iron mining you want. Picture God having placed iron in nice neat boulders on the surface, ready to be loaded up into a cart, ready for the shipping company to haul off.Shipping company:
All of the shipment of raw materials, either by land and sea, will take extensive shipping resources.Breeding operation:
Takes animals "sent by God" (including a male whiptail lizard!) (excluding things that crawl because of a mystical requirement about nostrils, ignoring what the entire rest of the old testament has to say about them). Breeds them to maximize genetic diversity. In 100 years. Oh, let's not even get into the requirements for doing this with, say, the elephants, since they only get a few generations. You're going to need some major speed improving techniques... artificial insemination, refrigeration, genetic profiling...Loading operation:
Each animal needs to go to the spot of the ark designed for it, and in many cases, be fitted into place. Plus, they're supposed to be trained to behave on the ark in specific ways, so that means lots of in-and-out with the animals. Of course, standard loading of everything else needs to be done.What did I miss? ------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

.[This message has been edited by Rei, 09-17-2003]

If more people like you existed, this thread wouldn't be needed. We're arguing against the concept of a global flood here that rearranged the entire earth and deposited all of the neatly sorted dinosaur fossils through some sorting mechanism which creationists have yet to explain, despite repeated requests to do so. (This sorting mechanism clearly can't work on niche, mass, body size, body shape, etc, but has to essentially work 100% of the time around the world).------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Hey, they're inbred enough... (thanks for the inspiration! Sure, it's a quick, rough edit, but hey!)------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

I can't find a single Bergman article in any non-creationist journal. Can you help? ------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Thanks, Allen. That enabled me to find his web page, instead of just pages talking about him. Now I can see how well the claim of over a hundred publications in non-creationist journals stands up. He has published 383 papers. The vast majority of them are creationist - including foreign creationist publications! Of the rest? Most of them are about teaching (especially reading). Next most is psych. Then come cars, book collecting, metal detectors, etc. One is even just the archives of a forum. Some things that he claims to have published in, such as "The New England Correspondent", are only mentioned on the internet at his web page. Some sound like they might be scientific - such as the "American Scientific Affiliation Newsletter" or "CEN Tech J" - until you actually look at what they are. He even got two in a humanist magazine (a counterpoint). He loves speaking about things that he is completely inexperienced to talk about, such as a unified approach to particle physics. He has an article that advocates lying in court as part of "Theocratic War Strategy". He has an article praising Wernher Von Braun, who used slave labor back in Nazi Germany. Real medical articles? Articles that have to do with biology? These are the only ones:216. The History and Evaluation of Noninvasive Medical Diagnostic Treatment and Research Technique. in Research Abstracts International, Ann Arbor: Univ. Microfilms, Vol. 17, Issue 3, 1991.251. Genetic Function of Introns as a Means of Reducing Copying Errors. Ohio Journal of Science, 94(2): 25 1994.299. Dyslexia. MENSA Bulletin. May 1996 p. 8-9 No. 396312. Use of the Internet to Compare Select Gene Sequences of Various Living Organisms Partnership for the Advancement of Chemical Technology. Final Project Abstracts for 1997 p.5. (*note: I question the level of peer review in PACT)337. and Ming You M.D. Ph.D. Models of Lung Cancer Chemoprevention.
Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America. 12 (5): 1037-1049, Oct. 1998.360. and J. Liu, P. Gu, G. Kelloff, C. Boone, M. You, Y. Wang. Detection of Genetic Alterations in Mouse Lung Adenocarcinomas by Two-Dimensional Gel Electrophoresis. Experimental Lung Research, 26(8):651-658, Dec. 2000.369. and Lin Lin, Yian Wang, Gary J. Kelloff, Ronald A. Lubet, and Ming You. Detection of Differentially Expressed Genes in Mouse Lung Adenocarcinomas. Experimental Lung Research. 27:217-229, 2001.Of course he expects to get critiqued after he says that, because when he says that, he just inadvertently encourages people to look at what he's actually published. He's only published 7 scientific papers! 3 of them were on the same subject (and had several co-authors). The only one that could possibly pertain to evolution is #251.* - Berman's page is: Error | The Institute for Creation Research------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 09-26-2003]